that's what you get when you haven't mastered a foreign language yet
You and me both... in my case the English is the foreign language though.
You're trying way too hard to suggest that we've been using coat of plates as well in order to stress its usefulness and capability, you make all these hints and suggestions to make accent on it.
Right. I owe you some explanation then with apologies. My "hints" were aimed at perceived ignorance and derogatory attitude towards the family of "plates" armour. I obviously don't know you personally and I have (had?) no idea how much knowledge in the matter you possess - most people remark "studded leather" upon seeing the likes of Visby or the hatanga. For underestimating you in this regard, as well as mis-recognizing your "contempt" of "plates", I apologize.
Secondly, I try to approach the history of the arms and armour holistically. For me the terms "brigandine", "Visby" coat of plates or "jack of plates" mean the same or at least
similar. They are of course different terms that the modern man applied to the equipment of the times and denote different styles of armour, but
in principle they are the same, save for practical improvements, material/skill limitations and vagaries of fashion. That is why you will not find the "Visby" pattern coat of plates in 1500's, as at that time, it had been superseded by the "brigandine".
I am well aware of how ubiquitous the plate was in the West. I am not trying to downplay the importance of the plate armour in its various forms - I believe we have misunderstood each other in this regard. I am however more interested in life and death of the lower echelons of the society and perceive the "poor man's plate" as an important piece of equipment of a common soldier.
Thirdly, I am fond of "experimental archeology". The sad truth about studying history is - we will never know for sure. Various "experts" may forward their peer-reviewed theories. You may read as many medieval eyewitness accounts as you'd like. You may dig out as many corroded lumps of metal and identify them as "mail coif" as you like. But, you will never know for sure the manner it was used, how exactly it was made and how widespread and common it was. All we have is more or less plausible theories. I therefore have huge respect for a student of HEMA that experiments with the stances or the member of the Russian HMB team that through experience and experiment perfects his or hers fighting harness. It's way better than just holding on to the well confirmed dogmas.
I've never heard about coat of plates being a derivative of eastern armor.
I can't recall the author off the top of my head. Maybe it was in one of the Mikhail Gorelik's works? Or Kriskó Gyula's treatise on the Mongol Invasion of 1240's? You know, one of the authors that does not share the western-centric view of the world, which seems to be an emerging trend in these days of political correctness. Details are vague though. I must have read it some years ago, and, as I usually research everything at once using some obscure sources, all I was left with is the general impression. I think the gist of it was:
a) the Crusaders left for Jerusalem clad in mail, came back wearing armoured surcotes;
b) the "Vikings" left for Byzanium clad in mail, came back wearing lamellar cuirasses and
Briost Bjorg;
c) the greatest concentration of depictions of the first CoP's and armoured surcotes seem to originate from Germany or Spain, both of which had frequent altercations with the "eastern" cultures;
d) the "eastern" armour of choice of the time is a form of hatanga degel as well as the lamellar armour;
e) the Europe was only just coming out of the "Dark Ages" at the time, and many other scientific novelties and improvements were imported via the crusading armies and their followers;
f) hence the notion the armour in that form (fabric reinforced with plates) was imported in it most primitive form, or at least heavily inspired by, the clash with the Eastern World in the form of Crusades, Mongol Invasion or the Reconquista.
This does not hinge on anything other than free thinking (or in some cases wishful thinking) considering how sparse, politically biased and incomplete the sources are. I do however urge you to pull together everything you know about the first depictions and descriptions of the armoured surcote and its origins and think about it for a minute.